![]() “The Stolen Valor Act of 2011 resolves these constitutional issues by clearly defining that the objective the law is to target and punish those who misrepresent their alleged service with the intent of profiting personally or financially.” “This is exactly what my legislation does,” said Heck, who is also a colonel in the Army Reserve. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) heeded that advice and quickly introduced a more narrow version of the Stolen Valor Act, this time specifying that it be illegal not just to lie about military service, but to benefit from it. ![]() It may, however, be possible substantially to achieve the government’s objective in less burdensome ways.” “It seeks to protect the interests of those who have sacrificed their health and life for their country by seeking to preserve intact the country’s recognition of that sacrifice in the form of military honors. “The act nonetheless has substantial justification,” Kennedy continued. “The act lacks any such limiting features.” “Although there are many statutes and common-law doctrines making the utterance of certain kinds of false statements unlawful, they tend to be narrower than the Act,” wrote Justice Anthony Kennedy in the 6-3 decision. His lawyers challenged the conviction, arguing that his lies were protected free speech and not criminal. He was fined $5,000 and sentenced to three years of probation. In fact, he had never even served in the military. ![]() The case was brought by lawyers for Xavier Alvarez, a California water district board official who claimed he had received the Medal of Honor. The Supreme Court ruled in June that the legislation passed in 2006 was over-reaching and that lying about military service protected by the First Amendment. It would make it illegal for a person to benefit from lying about being awarded military medals, including the Medal of Honor, the nation’s highest award for valor in combat. A revised Stolen Valor Act overwhelmingly passed the House on Thursday, 410-3.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |